If you had read a little further on in the standard, you would have
found the section which is actually relevant to the code above, (12.2
[class.temporary])

Indeed. Fully retracted. I am familiar with Tom's complaint, as
it is one I made myself way back in the past. However, it appears
that the standardisation committee addressed such complaints
earlier than I previously thought.

Apologies.

Accepted, of course.

And before there was a standard, no doubt all bets were off. In
Stroustrup (3rd edition, regrettably I didn't keep my copy of the 1st)
there are words implying that temporaries "used to initialize a named
object", whatever that means, might have an extended lifetime. I don't
know what the ARM, the nearest thing to a de-facto pre-standard, says on
this matter.